Re: [gnso-dow123] Consumer protection survey

[KathrynKL@xxxxxxx]

I am sure I don't agree.  But for argument's sake, Steve, that fits  within 
ICANN's limited scope and mission how?
 
 
<<metalitz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:

I think  it already is.   

-----Original Message-----
From: Ross  Rader [mailto:ross@xxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 5:33  PM
To: Steve Metalitz
Cc: Tom Keller; gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Niklas  Lagergren
Subject: Re: [gnso-dow123] Consumer protection  survey


Are you proposing that whois become a global tool for  accountability?

Steve Metalitz wrote:
> Another way to look at it  is that a global tool for accountability 
> should not be denied to  users just because one country provides 
> another means through its  laws.
> 
> Along that line, and relevant to our task of clarifying  the purpose of

> the various contacts within Whois, I have a  short  article from the 
> BNA Electronic Commerce and Law Report  describing a German court 
> ruling on September 29 "that the  administrative contact of a domain 
> name shares liability for unlawful  spam sent from the domain."  The 
> report emphasizes that the  contact incurs liability "merely as a 
> result of occupying that  position," and not as a result of also being 
> "listed in the Web site  imprint," which I assume is the mechanism Tom 
> refers to  below.
> 
> There is a link with the article where a copy of the  decision can be 
> found, but the copy is in German which unfortunately  I don't read.
> It is not stated in the report whether the domain in  question was 
> registered in a gTLD.
> 
> Steve   
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas  Keller [mailto:tom@xxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 3:44  AM
> To: Steve Metalitz
> Cc: gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Niklas  Lagergren
> Subject: Re: [gnso-dow123] Consumer protection  survey
> 
> In Germany there is a law stating that every owner of  a website run 
> for commercial means has to point out his identity on  it. Any failure 
> to so or the provision of wrong data can be ground to  close down that
site.
> What I'm trying to say is that there are more  then enough ways to deal

> with this issue except whois. Since whois  is a global technology it 
> certainly should not be used to fix local  problems.
> 
> Best,
> 
> tom
> 
> Am  27.10.2005 schrieb Steve Metalitz:
>>  Task Force members may be  interested in a major US consumer survey 
>> released yesterday under  the title, "Do we trust the Internet? Our
> poll
>> finds that  Web users are increasingly wary and demanding."   48
>  percent
>> of respondents said knowing who owns a Web site is very  important.  
>> This was up 16 points from results obtained in  2002, the biggest 
>> increase recorded for any category in the  survey.  When those who 
>> said
> 
>> this was  "somewhat important" are included, the total approaches 80%.
>> Of  course, Whois is one way this knowledge can be obtained.   
>>
>> See
>>  http://www.consumerreports.org/main/content/display_report.jsp?WebLog
>>  i
>> cS
>>  ession=Q2Dtghg17gPnx9ahACAgVFVvxs24MglklgvzKcZQoC8Rx8hk0QVO|859604093
>>  5
>> 46
>>  6213951/169937909/6/7005/7005/7002/7002/7005/-1|7246443674280633685/1
>>  6
>> 99
>>  37902/6/7005/7005/7002/7002/7005/-1&FOLDER%3C%3Efolder_id=802035&bmUI
>>  D
>> =1
>> 130425730525 and  http://www.consumerwebwatch.org/pdfs/princeton.pdf
>>   
>>  
>>
>>  -
>>
>>
>>
> 
> Gruss,
> 
>  tom
> 
> (__)        
> (OO)_____   
> (oo)    /|\    A cow is not entirely full  of
>   | |--/ | *    milk some of it is  hamburger!
>   w w w  w
>